Specpro Finals Paper 2

University of the East
20170149072
SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS PAPER

A finals requirement submitted to Atty. Gerard L. Chan, LL.M., M.B.A., for the 2nd semester of School
year 2019-2020
I
Making a will is a crucial decision
A will is a personal, solemn, revocable and free act by which a person disposes of his
property, to take effect after his death (Romarico Vitug vs CA, GR No. 82027). Since the will
expresses the manner in which a person intends how his properties be disposed, the wishes and
desires of the testator must be strictly followed.
The existence or non-existence of the will, determines the proper procedure to be taken in
the distribution of the testator’s properties. When a will is made by the testator, it must be
probated, when there is no will an extrajudicial judicial settlement of estate under Rule 74 sec. 1
of the Rules of Court may be chosen by the heirs. The procedure is outlined below.
Flowchart: Judicial Settlement of Estate
1. Publication of notice of hearing for 3

Petition for probate
consecutive weeks
of will
2. Notice to designated or known heirs,
legatees, devisees and executor
Issuance of Letters Testamentary or

Publication of Notice for
Letters of Administration (Special
Filing Claims
Administrator may be appointed)
Issuance of Order of Payment Payment of Claims: Sale

Period for filling claims or Sale of Properties /Mortgage /Encumbrances
Distribution of Estate
Magdangal M. De Leon & Dianna Louise R. Wilwayco, Special Proceedings Essentials for Bench and Bar
(2015)
Rules of Court of the Philippines
Philippine 1987 Constitution
Gemy Lito L. Festin, Special Proceedings (A Foresight to the Bar Exam and the Practice of Law) (2015)
Flowchart: Extrajudicial Settlement of Estate
Requisites: Register Public Instrument or Affidavit Bond:

1. No will  Equivalent to the value of personal
2. No debts property involved
3. Heirs are all of age or the  Certified under oath by the parties
minors are represented by the involved
judicial or legal representative  Conditioned upon payment of any just
Modes Available: claim that may be filed within 2 years
1. Public instrument or Affidavit after settlement and distribution of the
2. Ordinary action for partition estate
File Claims:
 Within 2 years after settlement Distribute Estate Publication
and distribution of estate
o An heir or other person
has been unduly
deprived of his lawful
participation in the
estate
 Minor or mentally incapacitated
o Within one year after
disability is removed
As can be seen judicial settlement of estate is very tedious and expensive. As required by
rule 76 of the Rules of Court, in the first step alone, the petition for probate of the will, a full
blown trial is required to determine whether the will be allowed for probate. In such case the
Court’s area of inquiry is limited to an examination of and a resolution on, the extrinsic validity
of the will which are the due execution thereof, the testatrix’s testamentary capacity and the
compliance with the requisites or solemnities by law prescribed. The probate court at this stage is
not called to rule on the intrinsic validity or efficacy of the provisions of the will, the legality of
any devise or legacy therein, except when the will is void on its face (Nuguid vs Nuguid, G.R.
No. L-23445, June 23, 1966). Since probate of a will is considered a special proceeding, there is
multiple appeals. This means that every step of judicial settlement is a final decision subject to
appeals, making it tedious and expensive. Appointing a special administrator is the only
interlocutory order in the process of judicial settlement.
(2015)
The overly clogged dockets of the Philippine court system make the judicial process of
settlement of estate very time consuming, most of the time to the detriment of the estate.
In the probate proceeding, deciding on the allowance or disallowance of the will, the
person who contests the allowance of the will must be an interested party. As defined, an
interested party is one who would be benefited by the estate such as an heir or one who has a
claim against the estate such as a creditor. The reason behind this requirement is so that the
courts and the litigants would not be molested by the intervention proceedings of a person with
no interest in the estate which would entitle them to be heard with relation thereto.
The appointment of an executor or administrator is what makes judicial proceedings

expensive. This is because aside from the docket fees and other legal fees to be paid, there is a
need to pay for the executor or administrator. The difference between an executor and
administrator are provided for in this table.
Executor Administrator
Nominated by the testator and appointed by the Appointed by the court in the following
court instances:
1. The will did not appoint an executor or
administrator
2. The executor appointed in the will is
incompetent, refused the appointment
or failed to give a bond
3. The will was disallowed
4. The deceased died intestate
Executor is required to present the will to the No such requirement
court within 20days after knowledge of the
testator’s death or after he knows that he was
appointed as executor
Testator may direct that the executor serve Always required to execute a bond
without bond or with only his individual bond
conditioned only to pay the testator’s debts; but
the court may require the executor to execute a
bond in case of a change in circumstance or for
other sufficient case
If the testator makes a provision in the will for Compensation is fixed as provided in Rule 85
the compensation of his executor, that section 7
provision shall be a full satisfaction for his
services, unless he renounces by a written
instrument all the claim to the compensation as
provided in the will
(2015)
Rule 84 section 2 of the Rules of Court provides that one of the powers of the executor or
administrator is to possess and manage the estate of the deceased and expenses of administration.
The power to possess the estate of the deceased makes such office imbued with trust and
fiduciary. And in cases of intestate proceedings makes an heir want to vie for such office. In
vying for such office, heirs would be engaging themselves in multiple court battles that would
force them to hire lawyers to aid them in guiding through the judicial process and for them to be
properly represented in court. This leads to an expensive litigation.
As far as creditors are concerned, claims against the estate are to be filed against to whom
letters testamentary or administration are granted.
Because of this tedious and expensive process, the Rules of Court provides that the heirs
may choose summary settlement of estate of small value. As provided in Rule 74 section 2 of the
Rules of Court, the following must be shown before the heirs ay make use of this provision: (1)
The complaint must allege that the gross value of the estate of the deceased does not exceed P
10,000.00; (2) A bond has been duly filed in an amount fixed by the court; and (3) A proper
hearing is held not less than one month nor more than three months from date of last publication
of the notice. This is available in both testate and intestate succession as long as the gross value
of the estate does not exceed P 10,000.00. There is still judicial adjudication, it is however
summary.
In contrast, extrajudicial settlement of estate does not require the involvement of the
court. The heirs are not bound to submit the property to a judicial administration and the
appointment of an administrator are superfluous and unnecessary proceedings. Before the heirs
may however avail themselves of extrajudicial settlement, the following requisites must be met:
(1) decedent died intestate; (2) that there are no outstanding debts at the time of the settlement;
(3) heirs are all of legal age or minors represented by judicial guardians or legal representatives;
(4) the settlement is made in a public instrument or by means of an affidavit; in case of a sole
heir, duly filed in the register of deeds; (5) publication of the extrajudicial settlement in the
newspaper of general circulation in the province once a week for 3 consecutive weeks; and (6)
filing of a bond equivalent to value of personal property poste with the register of deeds. If the
testator left only one heir, an affidavit of self-adjudication suffices.
Section 1 of Rule 74 of the Rules of court however does not preclude the heirs from
instituting administration proceedings, even if the estate has no debts, or obligation, if they do
not desire to resort for good reasons to an ordinary action of partition. While section 1 allows the
heirs to divide the estate among themselves as they see fit, or to resort to an ordinary action of
partition, it does not compel them to do so if they have good reasons to take a different course of
action. Said action is not mandatory or compulsory as may be gleaned from the use made therein
of the word may. If the intention is otherwise the framer of the rule would have employed the
(2015)
word shall as was done in other provisions that are mandatory in character (Arcillas v Hon.
Montejo G.R. No. L-21725, November 29, 1968).
It is presumed that the decedent left no debts if no creditor files a petition for letters of
administration within 2 years after the decedent’s death.
Now what could be “good reasons” for the appointment of an administrator? According
to jurisprudence, an administrator can be appointed when the testator has left unpaid debts
(Malahacan v Ignacio GR No 6207 August 4, 1911). In the case of Pereira vs CA the heirs being
at odds with each other is not one of those good reasons.
Note that the purpose of requiring the extra-judicial partition be put in a public document
and be registered is for the protection of creditors and the heirs themselves against tardy claims.
Object of registration is to serve as a constructive notice to others (Pada-Kilario vs CA GR No.
134329 January 19, 2000). Thus if there are no creditors, the fact that the extrajudicial settlement
is made verbally does not affect its validity.
The remedies against extrajudicial settlement depend when the aggrieved party is an heir
or a creditor, as outlined here in below:
Remedies Available to an Excluded Creditor Remedies Available to an excluded Heir

1. Contribution from distribution 1. Contribution from distribution
2. Execution against bond or sale of realty 2. Execution against bond or sale of realty
of decedent or both of decedent or both
3. Petition for relief 3. Petition for relief
4. Reopening by intervention within
reglementary period
5. New action to annul settlement within
reglementary period
6. Compel the settlement of estate
(intestate settlement, judicial)
Jurisprudence states that an action to annul the settlement is not a remedy available to a
creditor. In case of an unpaid creditor, the remedy is to appoint an administrator and settle the
claims with him ( McMicking vs Sy Conbieng, G.R. No. L-6871, January 15, 1912).
The rules of court provides a 2 year prescriptive period for both heirs and creditors to
settle their claims. This 2 year prescriptive period provided for in rule 74 sec. 4 however shall
only be applicable to those who participated in the extrajudicial partition. For those who didn’t
participate the prescriptive period shall be 4 years. In instances such as fraud, the 4 year
(2015)
prescriptive period shall be counted from the publication of the extrajudicial settlement. This is
because publication is notice to the world.
1335 words
(2015)
II
The Writs of Habeas Corpus, Amparo and Data
Writ of Habeas Corpus
The tumultuous period of the reign of former president Ferdinand Marcos lead to the
Plaza Miranda bombing in 1971. The act of terrorism was done by the Communist Party of the
Philippines’ armed wing the New People’s Army. To combat insurgency, there were forced
disappearances committed by military personnel. Most of the victims were killed raped and
tortured. This event in our history shaped the current features of the Writ of Habeas Corpus.
The writ of Habeas Corpus was devised and exists as a speedy and effectual remedy to
relieve persons from unlawful restraint. The prime specification for an application for this writ is
restraint of liberty. The essential object and purpose of this writ is to inquire into all manners of
involuntary restraint and to relieve a person therefrom if such restraint is illegal.
This writ is also the proper legal remedy to enable the parents to regain the custody of a
minor child even if the latter be in custody of a third person of her own free will (Sombong vs
Court of Appeals G.R No. 111876, January 31, 1996).
In a habeas corpus petition, the order to present an individual before the court is a
preliminary step in the hearing of the petition. The respondent must produce the person and
explain the cause of his detention. However this order is not a ruling on the propriety of the
remedy or on the substantive matters covered by the remedy. Thus, the order to produce the body
is not equivalent to a grant of the writ of habeas corpus (in the matter of the petition for Habeas
Corpus of Alejano vs Cabuay, G.R. No. 160792, August 25, 2005).
The person who may file this petition is the party for whose relief it is intended or by
some person on his behalf.
The judiciary as the upholder of rights and mediator between government and private
interests has the sole power to grant the writs of habeas corpus, data and Amparo.
Writ of Amparo
The writs of Amparo and habeas data were the brainchild of the then Chief Justice
Reynato Puno. The time of the then president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo was marred with cases
of enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings. The victims were the supposed members of
the New People’s Army and other insurgent groups in the Philippines. These writs were created
because the Habeas Corpus failed to provide efficacious legal remedy to victims of extrajudicial
killings and enforced disappearances. During those times once a petition for a writ of Habeas
(2015)
Corpus was filed, the defendants who are government officers would simply submit the usual
defense of alibi or non-custody of the body sought to be produced.
The remedy of the writ of amparo is an equitable and extraordinary remedy to safeguard
the right of the people to life, liberty and security as enshrined in the 1987 constitution. The rule
on the writ of amparo was issued as an exercise of the Supreme Court’s power to promulgate
rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights. It aims to address the
concerns of extrajudicial killings and enforced dis appearances. Protection includes conducting
effective investigations, organization of the government apparatus to extend protection to victims
of extra-legal killings or enforced disappearances or threats thereof and/or their families, and
bringing the offenders to the bar of justice (Secretary of National Defense vs Manalo, G.R. No.
193652).
This remedy is both a preventive and curative measure in addressing the problems of
extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances. It is preventive in that it breaks the
expectation of impunity in the commission of these offenses and it is curative in that it facilitates
the subsequent punishments of perpetrators by inevitably leading to subsequent investigation and
action. The writ’s curative role is an acknowledgement that the violation of the right to life,
liberty and security may be cause not only by a public official’s act but also by his omission
(Rodriguez vs Arroyo, G.R. No. 191805, November 15, 2011).
For this protective writ to issue it must be shown and proved by substantial evidence that
the disappearance was carried out by, or with the authorization support or acquiescence of, the
state or a political organization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the same or give
information on the fate or whereabouts of said missing persons with the intention of removing
them from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time (Castillo vs Cruz, G.R. No.
182165).
Writ of Habeas Data
Writ of Habeas data provides a judicial remedy to protect a person’s right to control
information regarding one’s self, particularly in instances where such information is being
collected through unlawful means in order to achieve unlawful ends. The proceedings for the
issuance of this writ do not entail findings of criminal, civil or administrative culpability. If the
allegations in the petition are proven through substantial evidence, then the court may: grant
access to the database or information; or enjoin the act complained of; or in case the database or
information contains erroneous data or information, order its deletion, destruction or rectification
(Rodriguez vs Arroyo G.R. No. 191805, November 15, 2011).
(2015)
This remedy is available against a public official or employee, or a private individual or
entity engaged in the gathering, collecting, or storing of data or information regarding the person,
family, home and correspondence of the aggrieved party.
However, one’s right to privacy is outweighed by the state interest in dismantling private
armed groups (Gamboa vs Chan, G.R. 193636, July 24, 2012).
In invoking the right to informational privacy when it comes to social media platforms,
for the issuance of writ of habeas data to lie, the petitioner must show that he made use of the
privacy tools available (Vivares vs St. Theresa’s College, G.R. No. 202666, September 29,
2014).
978 words
(2015)
III
The Change of Name a Matter of State Interest
A person’s name is humanity’s crucible of individuality and uniqueness. It establishes his

identity, from which his existence he reckons, in which the of cradle civilizations sought to
reason, making fields such as science, religion and civics.
A person’s name is a matter imbued with the states’ interest. This is because a man’s
name is the designation by which he is known and called in the community in which he lives and
is best known. Names are used merely as one method of indicating the identity of persons; they
are descriptive of persons for identification, since, the identity is the essential thing and it has
frequently been held that, when identity is certain, a variance in, or misspelling of the name is
immaterial. Names of individuals have two parts: the given name or proper name and the
surname or family name. the given or proper name is that which is given to the individual at birth
or baptism, to distinguish him from other individuals. The name or family name is that which
identifies the family to which he belongs and is continued from parent to child. The given name
may be freely selected by the parents for the child, but the surname to which the child is entitled
is fixed by law (Republic vs Court of Appeals and Maximo Wong, G.R. No. 97906, May 21,
1992)
Being imbued with the states’ interest, stringent requirements are required by the state to
change it. The proceedings being outlined in Rule 103 of the Rules of Court, the purpose of
which is to prevent fraud in substantial changes of a person’s name. In contrast RA 9048 as
amended by RA 10172 provides for the administrative procedure for clerical entries in civil
registries. Clerical Error is defined as a mistake committed in the performance of clerical work,
in writing, copying, transcribing or typing an entry in the civil register that is harmless and
innocuous, such as misspelled name or misspelled place of birth, mistake in the entry of day and
month in date of birth or the sex of the person or the like, which is visible to the eyes or obvious
to the understanding, and can be corrected or changed only by reference to other existing record
or records: Provided, however, that no correction must involve the change of nationality, age or
status of the petitioner.
The procedure and distinction between Rule 103 and RA9048 as amended by RA10172
is outlined below:
Rule 103 RA 9048

Scope Change of full name or Change of first name or
surname (Substantial nickname and correction of
corrections) clerical errors of entries in the
civil registry
(2015)
Nature of proceedings  Judicial  Administrative
 Hearing is necessary  No hearing required
Who may file A person desiring to change Any person having direct and
one’s name personal interest in the
correction of a clerical or
typographical error in an entry
and/or change of first name or
nickname
Initiatory Pleading Signed and verified Sworn Affidavit
Where to file RTC of the province in which  Local civil registry office
the petitioner resided for 3 of the city or
years prior to filing municipality where the
record being sought to be
corrected or changed is
kept
 Local civil registrar of
the place where the
interested party is
presently residing or
domiciled
 Philippine Consulate
Contents of the petition  Petitioner has been a  Facts necessary to
bonafide resident of establish the merits of the
the province where the petition
petition is filed for  Particular erroneous
atleast 3 years prior to entry or entries which are
the date of such filing sought to be corrected
 The cause for which and/or the change sought
the change of to be made
petitioner’s name is  Petition shall be
sought supported by the
 The name asked for following documents:
1. A certified true
machine copy of
the certificate or
of the page of the
registry book
containing the
entry or entries
sought to be
corrected or
changed
2. At least 2 public
(2015)
or private
documents
showing the
correct entry or
entries upon
which the
correction or
change shall be
based
3. Other documents
which petitioner
or the city or
municipal civil
registrar or the
consul general
may consider
relevant and
necessary for the
approval of
petition
Grounds  Name is ridiculous  Petitioner finds the first

tainted with dishonour name or nickname to be
and extremely difficult ridiculous tainted with
to write or pronounce dishonour or extremely
 Consequence of difficult to write or
change of status pronounce
 Necessity to avoid  The new first name or
confusion nickname has been
 Having continuously habitually and
used and been known continuously used by
since childhood by a petitioner and he has
Filipino name, and been publicly known by
unaware of her alien that first name or
parentage nickname in the
 A sincere desire to community; or
adopt a Filipino name  The change will avoid
to erase signs of confusion
former alienage all in
good faith and without
prejudicing anybody
Notice and Publication Publication of the notice of Publish the whole affidavit for
hearing for 3 consecutive atleast once a week for 2
weeks in a newspaper of consecutive weeks in change of
(2015)
general circulation first name
Posting Not required Duty of the civil registrar or
consul to post petition in a
conspicuous place for 10
consecutive days
Persons to be notified  Solicitor General  Civil registrar
 Provincial Fiscal
 City Fiscal
 Interested parties
Coverage  Correction of clerical  Correction of clerical or
or typographical errors typographical errors in
in any entry in civil the civil registry,
registry documents, including correction of
except corrections date of birth and sex
involving the change  Change of first name or
in sex, age, nationality nickname in the civil
and status of a person registry
 Change of a person’s
first name or
nickname in his or her
civil registry
Where to appeal Court of appeals under rule Civil registrar General under
41 section 7 or court of appeals
under rule 43
Note that a change of name is not a matter of right but of judicial discretion.
In the case of Republic vs Court of Appeals and Maximo Wong, the court recognized
that the primordial purpose of Rule 103 of the Rules of Court is to give a person the opportunity
to improve his personality and provide his best interest. The petitioner in that case who is an
adopted child even went so far as to ask the adoptive mother to change his surname for the
benefit of his social and business dealings
The Supreme Court allowed the change of name and gender of a person that has a
genetical disorder that caused to change his sex from female to male as time went by (Republic
vs Cagandahan G.R. No. 166676, September 12, 2008). It didn’t however allow a change of sex
and name of a transsexual since there is no special law in the Philippines regarding sex change
and their effects (Silverio vs Republic, G.R. No. 174689).
A petition to change of name to remove the child’s middle name is not allowed, if the
only reason is for the child’s convenience in a society abroad. Also this petition is best left to that
(2015)
child when he reaches the age of majority (In re; Petition of Julian Wang, G.R. No. 159966,
March 30, 2005)
Because of RA 9048 and its amendment RA 10172 the correction or change of clerical or
typographical errors can now be made through administrative proceedings without the need for a
judicial order. In effect RA 9048 removed from the ambit of Rule 108 of the Rules of court the
correction of such errors. Rule 108, as it now stands, applies only to substantial changes and
corrections in entries in the civil register (Republic vs Cagandahan supra)
The following entries under the law may now be changed through administrative
proceedings:
1. First name
2. Nickname
3. Day and month in the date of birth
4. Sex
The same law is however clear that administrative correction of entries must not involve
change of nationality, age and status.
Where the effect of correction of an entry in a civil registry will change the status of a person
from legitimate to illegitimate, the same cannot be granted in summary proceedings (Lee vs
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 118387, October 11, 2001)
Recognition by the Bureau of Immigration and Department of Justice that petitioner is a

natural born Filipino citizen will not change the citizenship of a person. No substantial change or
correction in an entry in civil register can be done without a judicial order and under the law a
change in citizenship status is a substantial change. Substantial corrections to the nationality or
citizenship of persons recorded in the civil registry should be effected through petition filed in
court under rule 108 of the rules of court.
894 Words
(2015)
IV
Administrators and Executors Managers of a Dead man’s Bounties
Religion teaches us that when a person dies, he only has his soul with him; all other
earthly belongings are left behind. Succession, the art of distributing a dead person’s belongings
then comes into play.
Article 777 states that the rights to succession are transmitted from the moment of death
of the decedent. Nevertheless the procedure outlined in the rules of court must first be observed
before the actual transmission. Once such procedure is complied with, the rights of the heirs
retroact to the time of death of the person whose estate was settled.
A person during has lifetime has complete control over his properties; he has the right to
dispose and alienate such that even during his lifetime he can petition for the probate of his own
will.
A will under article 783 is defined as an act where by a person is permitted, with the
formalities prescribed by law, to control to a certain degree the disposition of his estate to take
effect after his death
Who manages the estate after the death of testator depends whether he left a will and he
assigned an executor or if he died intestate. If the latter happens and the heirs for good reasons
have decided not go for an extrajudicial settlement of estate will go to court and appoint an
administrator. When the testator left a will but it was not allowed to probate, then the
appointment of administrator shall be in order.
Section 1 rule 78 of the rules of court enumerates those who are disqualified to serve as
administrators or executors: minors, those who do not reside in the Philippines and those who are
in the opinion of the court are deemed to be unfit to execute the duties of the trust by reason of
drunkenness, improvidence or want of understanding or integrity or by reason of an offense
involving moral turpitude.
Section 4 of rule 78 of the rules of court provides that when the will is admitted to
probate it may issue either of three possible authorities: (1) letters testamentary; (2) letters of
administration with the will annexed. Letters of administration will only be issued if there is no
will or the will is not allowed to probate.
This table summarizes the authority that may be issued by the court depending on the
surrounding circumstances:
(2015)
Letters Letters of Letters of
Testamentary Administration with administration
the Will Annexed
Definition The authority issued The authority issued The authority issued
to the executor named by the court to a by the court to a
in the will to manage competent person to competent person to
and administer the administer the estate administer the estate
estate of the deceased if the of the deceased who
executor named in the died intestate or with
will refuses to accept a void will
the office, or is
incompetent
When Issued The executor There is a will but the  Decedent died
 Is competent executor: intestate
 Accepts the  Is incompetent  The will is
trust  Refuses the void or not
 Gives the trust admitted to
required bond  Fails to give probate
the bond
required by the
rules
Section 6, rule 78 of the rules of court provides the order of preference of who can be
appointed as administrator:
1. The surviving spouse

2. Next of kin
3. Persons requested by the surviving spouse or the next of kin
4. Principal creditors
5. Other persons selected by the court
As a general rule only one administrator can be appointed, however the supreme court has
approved of appointment of more than one administrator for the estate and those interested
therein when (Suntay III vs Cojuangco-Suntay, G.R. No. 183053, October 10, 2012):
1. To have the benefits of their judgement and perhaps at all times to have different interests
represented
2. Where justice and equity demand that opposing parties or factions be represented in the
management of the estate of the deceased
3. Where the estate is large or from any case and intricate and perplexing one to settle
(2015)
4. To have all interested persons satisfied and the representatives to work in harmony for the
best interest of the estate
5. When a person entitled to the administration of an estate desires to have another
competent person associated with him in the office
It is important to note that clerks of court are prohibited from being appointed as
administrators of estate because it is tempting for them to not be impartial in the proceedings.
Once an administrator or executor has been appointed all claims against the estate shall
be filed against him. The procedure for the claims against the estate is outlined below:
Flowchart: Claims Against the Estate
Granting of letters testamentary Court to issue a notice requiring all persons having
or administration money claims against the decedent to file them in
the office of the clerk of court
Publication of notice to
creditors
Creditors to deliver the claim with the necessary vouchers
to the clerk of court and serve copies thereof on the
executor or administrator
Answer of the executor or administrator

within 15 days after service of the copy of
the claim
Disposition of admitted claim

Trial of contested claim
Court approval
Court may order
without hearing Filing of answers to the claim
known heirs to be
notified and heard
Claim referred to commissioner

Opposition
(2015)
Once an administrator or executor has been appointed, all properties of the estate under
the possession of the heirs shall be required to be surrendered to the administrator or executor.
The testator’s spouse losses the powers of administration over the testator’s properties
once an administrator has been appointed.
Section 1 of rule 80 of the rules of court provides that the court may appoint a special
administrator when there is delay in granting the letters testamentary or of administration by any
cause including an appeal from the allowance or disallowance of the will or when the executor or
administrator is a claimant against the estate he represents. In the latter case the special
administrator administers only the portion over which there is such claim.
The powers of executors and administrators are:
1. To possess and manage estate of the deceased to pay debts and expenses of
administration (rule 82 section2)
2. Executor or administrator of estate of a deceased partner has access to, examine and take
copies of books and papers relating to the partnership business and examine and make
invoices of the property belonging to such partnership (rule 84 section 1)
3. With the approval of the court, to compound or compromise with a debtor of the
deceased (rule 87 section 4)
The duties of an administrator are (rule 84 section 3)
1. To maintain the estate in tenable repair and

2. Deliver the same to the heirs or devisees when directed by the court
An administrator or executor has no power to continue the business in which the decedent
is engaged in at the time of his death. His authority is to wind up the business operations. He is
therefore liable for losses and expenses in maintain the business (Wilson vs Rear, G.R. No.
31860, October 16, 1930).
In the settlement of estate proceedings, the distribution of the estate properties can only
be made after all the debts, funeral charges, expenses of administration, allowance to the widow
and estate tax have been paid (rule 90 section 1); or before payment of said obligations only if
the distributes or any of them gives a bond in a sum fixed by the court conditioned upon the
payment of said obligations within such time as the court directs, or when the provision is made
to meet those obligations (Estate of Ruiz vs Court of Appeals, G.R. Bo. 118671, January
29,1996)
(2015)
Before the distribution of estate there must first be a determination of all the assets of the
estate and payment of all debts and expenses in a process called liquidation and a declaration of
heirs. Then towards the end a project of partition will be prepared and presented before the court.
This is a proposal for the distribution of the hereditary estimates and it determines the persons
entitled thereto.
The probate court loses jurisdiction of an estate under administration only after the
payment of all the debts and the remaining estate delivered to the heirs entitled to receive the
same. The finality of the approval of the project of partition by itself alone does not terminate the
probate proceedings. As long as the order of the distribution of the estate has not been complied
with, the probate proceedings cannot be deemed closed and terminated. This means that a
judicial partition is not final and conclusive. It does not prevent an heir from bringing an action
to obtain his share, provided the prescriptive period has not closed (Guilas vs Judge of the court
of first instance of Pampanga and Alejandro Lopez, G.R. No. L-26695, January 31, 1972)
The final decree of distribution will then be issued. It has the effect of vesting title to the
land of estate in the distributes (De Kilayko vs Tengco, G.R. No. L-26695)
1277 words
(2015)
Bibliography
Magdangal M. Deleon & Diana Louise R. Wilwayco, Special Proceedings Essentials for the
bench and bar (2015) pp 191- 195
bench and bar (2015) pp 90
bench and bar (2015) pp 84-86
bench and bar (2015) pp 537-540
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus#The_Philippines
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amparo_and_habeas_data_in_the_Philippines
Gemy Lito L. Festin, Special Proceedings ( A foresight to the bar exam and the practice of law)
(2015) pp 307- 313
(2015)

Specpro Finals Paper 2

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Specpro Finals Paper 2

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

University of the East

SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS PAPER

Making a will is a crucial decision

Flowchart: Judicial Settlement of Estate

1. Publication of notice of hearing for 3

Issuance of Letters Testamentary or

Issuance of Order of Payment Payment of Claims: Sale

Requisites: Register Public Instrument or Affidavit Bond:

The appointment of an executor or administrator is what makes judicial proceedings

Remedies Available to an Excluded Creditor Remedies Available to an excluded Heir

The Writs of Habeas Corpus, Amparo and Data

Writ of Habeas Corpus

Writ of Habeas Data

The Change of Name a Matter of State Interest

A person’s name is humanity’s crucible of individuality and uniqueness. It establishes his

Rule 103 RA 9048

Grounds  Name is ridiculous  Petitioner finds the first

Recognition by the Bureau of Immigration and Department of Justice that petitioner is a

Administrators and Executors Managers of a Dead man’s Bounties

1. The surviving spouse

Flowchart: Claims Against the Estate

Answer of the executor or administrator

Disposition of admitted claim

Claim referred to commissioner

The powers of executors and administrators are:

The duties of an administrator are (rule 84 section 3)

1. To maintain the estate in tenable repair and

Potrebbero piacerti anche